Frankly, I appreciate the context, it’s artistic freedom. Some see issues with it from a narrow point of view. Although the practical realism is obvious, but it shouldn’t be a limitation of what you want to make. I can see the work with lighting and materials, also recent events in Australia make this idea, a desire for many there where we could protect our environment from those fires. So it’s a matter of personal perspective.

Yes, and naturally those trees’ canopies are concentrated at the top Also, please don’t tell me what to do, and I in turn promise to not tell you where to go. Also also, it would help if you actually followed the conversation first.

No, according to me (or rather, according to nature) they, if able, i.e. if survive, would grow a rich canopy at the top and discard the lowest branches. Also, trees under open sky, even in poor conditions, do not equate a tree in a hole that would only be getting sunlight for a number of hours in a year. Also, commenting that a render looks more real than the subject is no more than it is and does not equate telling someone how to do art.

That’s like what, three strawmen in just two posts that you tried to build? All while being mad, for some reason. Wow.